>>77429777
Why the fuck would you ever want to look like that
It’s like an inflated fat retard

>>77429777
You go walking every day, right? Well that involves exercising your legs every day. You can do it but it isn't necessarily the best way to grow muscle.

>>77429779
You’re joking right? He looks amazing

>>77429777
You can, a lot of beginner routines are fullbody 3x a week

>>77429784
you're the nigga people are talking about when they say men dont understand what body type women like. his physique is technically impressive but he is very unattractive

>>77429796
NTA but there is a huge difference between full body 3/wk and full body 6-7/wk. In the latter case the workout has to be much lighter to avoid accumulating fatigue.

>>77429798
Women love the "teddy bear" strong + soft look. (Teddy bear is actually what they call it). It's popular among more mature women.

you would get tendonitis because joints take longer to recover than muscle. i think there's some heavy/light/medium high frequency programs that work though

>>77429784
He looks like a gorilla

>>77429810
I think if anything, such a program would be better for tendons. If someone is a retard and lift heavy weights to failure every day, yeah, they're going to get tendonitis. But if you do ultra light weights. Like, 15 lb curls, sub-1pl8 bench, and you do them slow and controlled, it's sustainable day to day and will develop your tendons. That sort of strategy is what they actually use for tendon rehab.

>>77429806
sure, but not this guy. his face doesnt suit his body at all which is part of the problem. as the other anon said, he unfortunately looks like an inflated fat retard. at best this guy is the male equivalent of a slam pig, but the difference is that he has to dedicate his entire life to looking like that, whereas a female slampig just eats like shit.

>>77429817
using bitch weights isn't a very good strategy to build muscle. I question the motivation to lift full body every day

>>77429816
if being a gorilla in terms of musculature and strength isn't your goal you aren't a real man

File: 482674992355.jpg (2.77 MB, 3792x3156)

2.77 MB JPG

>not reaching failure on every set with negatives as a natty

And thus you have daily threads on /fit/ filled with newfags that "can't progress".

>>77430048
It everyone wants to huge

>>77429777
Yeah but to put it simply the any amount of work that is enough to make you grow is also going to have fatigue accumulate faster than it is shed. So some kind of deload schedule or management mechanism needs to be in place.

It just seems too problem prone especially for shoulders. I'd probably try to vary your lifts a lot to not have the same stress pattern occuring often.
Like for chest have a cycle of
Machine press
Db incline bench
Pec deck
Dips
Cable cross
And just cycle through them day to day

>>77429777
At that frequency, most people can't recover quickly enough from the amount of work needed to generate muscle growth. I think the practical upper limit for hypertrophy is something like 2-3 sessions per week, depending on the person and the body part. For example, my legs recover pretty slowly, so I only train them once every 7-10 days ish, but my upper body can recover from training it twice per week. Some people can hit legs three times per week just fine as long as they keep the volume down (Fortitude Training does this).
There is stuff like Easy Strength that involves very high frequency and lower intensity, but it's not great for building muscle. It's more useful for building the skill of doing a given lift. I remember Dan John writing about alternating it with a mass program (something like six weeks each) to try to use each phase as a lever that improved the results of the other, basically like a simpler version of old school block periodization, but I don't know anyone who's tried it.

File: dat.png (955 KB, 905x1024)

955 KB PNG

>>77430048
> assuming that microworkouts, filler/refeed concepts arent variables of reaching perfection and that "the americanism of overworking" is somehow a new fad phenomen or even slightly ideal.
reminder that this poster's experience and knowledge is extremely limited/basic at best, it is preching mentzer not to you elevate you but to flatten you.

>>77429777
some powerlifters lift like that with different variations for each day, doing 60-75%1RM for each set and keeping several reps in the bank. Good way to grease the groove.

>monday
bench press
squat
deadlift

>tuesday
DB bench
front squat
RDLs

and so on with rest on the weekends

>>77430150
nta but

1. what the fuck are you talking about, you sound like a schizoid

2. needing to train to failure or close to failure to make gains just makes logical sense. you're signalling to your body that you need it to be stronger. why else would it dedicate resources to muscle hypertrophy?

File: arnold 1969.jpg (42 KB, 800x600)

42 KB JPG

Finally a good thread.

>>77429777
>full body every day
We don't know for sure if training a muscle every day can work for everyone, but doing even just 1 set for a muscle every day is already gonna be a challenge.

It doesn't seem likely that you can recover from more than 1 set per muscle group of 5+ reps every day if you train to failure.

By avoiding failure and working with singles, doubles and maybe triples with 5RM loads it would be possible to do more than 1 set for a muscle every day and recover fine, but we don't know if it would be optimal for hypertrophy.
In theory there shouldn't be a problem.
>>77429810
>>77429817
What causes tendonitis is overuse due to too much volume not how many days of the week you happen to train a muscle.
Higher reps with light weights would be worse for tendons and muscle recovery.
>>77430048
>failure
>negatives
The former is mostly performative, and the latter are completely performative.
Negatives or "forced reps" are completely worthless and there is nothing magical about training to failure if you're using proper loads.
>>77430089
There's no need to alternate exercises, by doing so you would actually lower the rate of gains because you keep having to relearn movement patterns and thus how to properly activate muscles.
Just do the same effective movements for each individual muscle.
>>77430125
1 direct set done to failure appears to be enough to stimulate growth in trained lifters if done every 48-72h even if not done to failure.
There is really no reason why doing 1 set doesn't stimulate growth at least for a certain duration of time, in fact not even a full set done to failure is needed to stimulate at least some growth, the only requirement is that it is done regularly enough.
How regularly that needs to be for minimal gains seems to be around 72h, for optimal gains we have no idea, and it probably depends on training age and muscle group in question.

>>77429784
you are homosexual

>>77430215
>There's no need to alternate exercises, by doing so you would actually lower the rate of gains because you keep having to relearn movement patterns and thus how to properly activate muscles.
>Just do the same effective movements for each individual muscle.
That is absolutely asinine in reasoning you don't forget a movment doing it every 5th or 6th day. Even procard lifters rotate lifts entirely in and out of their program for months. You can retrain a lift by just switching out a set of your normal variant with a set of the new lift for a week or two and gradually removing sets of the old and adding sets of the new if you're super scared.

>>77429798
I agree with you but caring about what women like is fucking retarded
every man should aspire to be so large simply just to piss women off for just existing

>>77429777
It's a waste of your time but it doesn't seem to be worth much anyway.

>>77429777
Boomer now 33 best way for me to train is volume volume volume and recovery hitting as many muscle groups as possible

>>77430368
I hope you see how silly this is in 3 years when the last bit of your igf-1 disappears

>>77429779
Smaev is a typical Russian nerd autist. Can't call him incel or chud, since he got woman pregnant and roids turned him gay so he fucks either way.

But he's a typical autist from a Russian commieblack, depressed so he chose lifting to not drink himself to death like majority of Russians.

>>77430433
Also Eastern Euros have very good bodybuilding genetics when it comes to mass, frame and size. So roiding blew him the fuck up. He probably doesn't even take as much as online experts claim he does.

>>77430300
Even if I exaggerate the problem of having to relearn movement patterns with every time you switch exercises there's still no need to alternate exercises that target the same muscle groups.
One could think of hypothetical scenarios in which maybe there is a benefit in alternating exercises in order to avoid specific joint discomfort in certain individuals that for whatever reason are just a bit more fragile.
But then again those same people could simply stick with effective exercises that cause them the least discomfort and dial the volume/intensity up or down depending on how they're feeling and performing.

Keeping exercises the same helps tracking actual progress.

if you arnt going to failure you by definition are not building muscle - inducing hypertrophy

it would be a waste of time, more inefficient, just retarded every way around. no reason to do this unless you are being a annoying faggot

>>77432210
>One could think of hypothetical scenarios in which maybe there is a benefit in alternating exercises in order to avoid specific joint discomfort in certain individuals that for whatever reason are just a bit more fragile.
That is what I said. If you're doing a lift every for the same group every day it needs to have to variation. Connective tissue does not fortify fast enough to keep up with that. It will certainly be an issue in the long term even with the most machine stable movments because there's a building recovery deficit on connective tissue. Varying the stresses concentrates that less on one or two bands of either tendon or ligament except on joints where it's unavoidable like knees. Even perfect form isn't going to stop this wear if it's this frequent.

>>77430125
I do PLPxPP
I train to or near failure on basically every exercise. And I do like 8 sets of compounds in one session.
I've been progressing pretty slowly and lately my lifts have been going down and my joints sometimes kinda ache.
Am I doing too much? Should I decrease the number of sets or intensity?

>>77429802
But wont the one working less be able to use rest days as a way of getting rid of fatigue?

>>77429777
temporarily sure, but I think to really gain past some point you will have to push closer to failure with enough reps to stimulate further progression and then you need much lighter days to recover. and once you have such stimulating heavy days then the light/recovery days become kind of pointless

>>77430215
>Higher reps with light weights would be worse for tendons and muscle recovery.
Doing high reps with light weights once or twice a day is literally how you rehab injured tendons.

It would be shit for hypertrophy though which is what most people want, unless they're a farmer doing repetitive work for 8 hours a day.

>>77432392
Yeah, the one working less will be able to accomplish more due to less fatigue and tendon irritation

>>77430215
>1 direct set done to failure appears to be enough to stimulate growth in trained lifters if done every 48-72h
I hear this a lot and tried it myself. I got a little stronger and presumably would have gotten bigger over time, but it was very slow. "Stimulate growth" does not necessarily mean "stimulate maximal growth". I'm thinking there's some dose threshold to initiate growth (that one set), then a period of proportional returns with more volume, then some tapering off period where you hit diminishing returns. But the actual thresholds will be different for everyone.
For me, I found that I needed more time to recover on some things, and that I could add more volume for more results without increasing that recovery period, up to a point. I can easily knock out 20-30 near-failure sets between two back workouts in a week and recover fine, but I don't seem to get more out of it vs half as many. So I'm currently doing ~8 near-failure sets per session, in a PPxLPPx type split.

>>77432382
How long has it been since you had time off or a deload? If it was working before, you might just need a break, especially with a lot of failure sets. Most people can't just bang their heads against the wall like that for more than like 6-8 weeks without a break.
Regarding volume, I doubt you're doing too much overall, unless you're doing a lot more on top of those failure sets (isolations, etc). I set my volume based on my mind-muscle connection - after like 6-8 good sets, I lose the feeling and figured any sets after that aren't as productive.
I think the soience is recommending 10-20 total sets per week as the most common effective range.

>>77429784
He looks like shit.

>>77432512
>How long has it been since you had time off or a deload?
Had a 12 day vacation a week ago, before that I had been doing that program for about 4 months with like a few missed workouts but otherwise pretty consistently. I also added a few sets per workout in the last month because I felt like I was being a bitch and doing too little.

>>77432539
Post body

>>77433972
So you trained for four months total without any real break, with the last month being higher volume, then you took a vacation, if I'm reading that right.
Was your progress good in the beginning of that four months?
When did the lifts start going down? If you're coming back from the break with somewhat weaker lifts, then you might just need to get back into the groove, or you might have been running on stress hormones before, which isn't ideal for the long term anyway. However, if the lifts started going down in that last month with added volume, you might have stepped over your recovery threshold. In that case, I'd just bring the volume back down to where it was, or maybe even a smidge lower.
In either case, try to plan a deload every 4-8 weeks. It sounds like you went three months without any major issues, so you can probably go on the longer end there with every eight weeks. You'll want to do the deload before things go to shit instead of after.
If you really want to experiment, you can try to find your lower limit for progress as well, since you apparently found the upper limit. Then you'll have a range you can work with.

>>77430437
Nope. Most have bodies like pajeets.

>>77429781
>walking
>considered as exercise
Dont listen to dyels like this

>>77432512
>I hear this a lot and tried it myself. I got a little stronger and presumably would have gotten bigger over time, but it was very slow.
Muscle growth is insanely slow.
> I'm thinking there's some dose threshold to initiate growth
There has to be, but it's lower than even just 1 full working set to failure with 80% 1RM.
You only need enough time during which a muscle is very highly activated while also contracting slowly enough for contraction-coupling to take effect within its muscle fibers in order for them to experience tension which is what gives you the growth stimulus in exercise.
From a purely theoretical physiology prespective based on known mechanisms and also evolutionary biology there is really no good reason as to why one has to do a whole bunch of contractions in a given session for muscles to respond best vs doing intense contractions sparingly throughout the week in fact if anything doing the latter should be superior in every way in minimizing muscle damage and fatigue buildup.

This thread is discussing the possibility of making a full body every day working, not whether or not everyone should do it.
Because in order to make it work you would have to change your mindset completely with training. You wouldn't feel like you're training like a bodybuilder but more like an olympic weightlifter almost and would be basically forced to do single sets for each muscle and work with lower repetitions and with possibly even reps in reserve.

>>77434629
Are you fucking retarded? Try exercising reading comprehension and try to understand the point I am trying to make when I say walking doesn't cause hypertrophy. Do I need to make a tiktok meme for you zoomers about training until failure?

>>77434637
>contraction coupling
I meant contractile proteins producing force sorry